University,of Southern California
Volume LXX, Number 19
Los Angeles, Californio
Friday, October 15, 1976
Teamster-university debate hinges on lie detector test
BY PATTI WOLF
Staff Writer
A debate of the Physical Plant unionization issue between Teamster Local 208 and the university will occur if a custodian who accused Arnold F. Shafer. Physical Plant director, of bribery will take a lie detector test, said Gary Overstreet, a university attorney.
Francisco Gutierrez, a law student involved with the Pro-Union Committee, would also be required to take the test before the debate could occur, Overstreet said.
“The union would not even consider such a request,” said Greg Roth, a Teamster organizer fox Local 208. The university responded to the Teamster request for a debate by stipulating conditions the union could not meet. Roth said.
As a counter-proposal, the Teamsters, through Willie Smith, their attorney, have suggested that Shafer and Roth answer questions and charges from Physical Plant workers while both are monitored by lie detectors. Smith has been unable to reach Overstreet, Roth said. Overstreet said he has heard nothing of the proposal and that is not dodging the union.
The lie detector request was made because an investigation demonstrated the charges against Shafer were ‘out-and-out lies,” Overstreet said. Union personnel ‘‘know damn well Shafer didn't bribe anybody.” the attorney said.
Shafer was accused of offering custodial workers $100 to $150 in raises if workers would cease unionization activities. The director denied this and all other charges of harassment and intimidation leveled against him and his plant supervisor by at least four custodial workers in a previous interview.
If the accusations were true, the university “could be in plenty of hot water,” Overstreet said.
The university could be charged with violating the Taft-Hartley Act if workers who have knowledge of bribery, harassment or physical abuse signed an affidavit, said Louis Gordon, assistant regional director for the National Labor Relations Board. The act is designed to prevent employers from restraining workers’ attempts to unionize.
If this action were taken and the university won the election, then the results could be set aside, and the board could rule that no fair election could be held here and recognize the Teamsters as the workers’ bargaining agent, Overstreet said.
The election could also be held again, he added. But no criminal action could be filed against the university or Shafer.
The Pro-Union Committee had no plans to file charges against the university. Gus Frias, a student representative ofthe Pro-Union Committee and a member of MECHA, said. However, action might be taken against the university if the unionization
(continued on page 5)
Alcohol-use liability discussed
A panel of staff and student leaders Thursday discussed unresolved problems arising from the use of alcohol on campus. Attempts were made to clarify questions of liability for damages and use of university funds for purchase of alcohol.
Presently, if liquor is bought with university funds, the school may be held liable for damages caused by intoxicated persons, said Kirk Hastings, a spokesman for the Inter-Fraternity Council.
In the residence halls, each student pays about $10 into a programming fund, much of which is kept for social use in the hall. None ofthis may go towards alcohol.
The panel agreed that resident advisers are not policemen.
“There is no way we can prevent drinking. Our stance is to at least point out its illegality,” said Robert L. Mannes, dean for student life.
On the Row. however, a dispute arises. About half the houses are university-owned, and half are privately owned. Those that are privately owned and financed claim they have free reign over their activities, including purchase and use of alcohol. The university maintains that by being under uni versity sanction, the university is liable for their actions.
The university and fraternities are intimately linked Mannes said. “Since the university provides services to them, it is implicit that the university ac-
cept responsibility for them.”
Present guidelines state that alternative beverages must be available, alcohol should be mentioned in advertising and a dean or director of the facility must approve its use.
On the other hand, it is feasible that if a certain area is declared private, liquor may be served in accordance with existing university and state laws. The sale of alcohol to persons under 21 would still be illegal.
The next meeting of the panel will draft possible guidelines for staff and student leaders in connection with events in which alcohol is served, determine specific answers to legal questions and try to define the use of university funds.
EARTHQUAKE—Ed Hill is not escaping the rubble of a typical California catastrophe but merely heaving himself out of a gritty situation during a recent geology fieldtrip. DT photo by Dean Dunn.
Dorm residents to take part in menu planning
BY CARLA SCHALMAN
Recent complaints have prompted plans for the creation of a menu-planning committee for the residence halls. The unit, which will include students, was formed by the Food and Housing Committee.
Charges of poor food quality and a lack of menu variety were made Wednesday by residence hall representatives during the Food and Housing Committee’s first meeting.
All meal suggestions will be taken into consideration, said Guy Hubbard, director of Auxiliary Services. “We serve what you want; your input is exactly what we base our planning on,” he said.
Residents have expressed a desire for a wider variety of food than is now being served, said Marisa Malpezzi, a College-University Residence Hall food-and-housing representative.	'
Last week, for example, chicken was served four times, she said.
A great deal of food is wasted because students taste a small portion and throw the rest of the meal away, Malpezzi said.
The grievances were presented at a meeting attended by residence hall and apartment representatives and managers and residence advisers.
Administrative representatives included Hubbard, Herb Ellis, residential food service manager; Randy Rice, director of housing; and Paul Copeland, director of food service.
Malpezzi also reported that there are mice and cockroaches in College-University residence hall.
“Personal hygiene in rooms is important,” Hubbard said. “Open food attracts pests.”
Ron Oestrich, Harris Plaza representative, said there is a pest problem in that building.
The location and time that pests are seen must be reported immediately in order for action to be taken, Rice said.
Southern California is prone to pest control problems, particularly in warm weather, he said.
“I don’t know how we can ever get total elimination,” he said. “If the situation is critical, we will call in the exterminator everyday, if necessary.”
(continued on page 5)
Parking losses anger students
A wire fence separating faculty-staff from student parking has been raised in one of the new parking structures, setting off angry protest from commuter students.
Drivers were greeted Thursday morning with more than 50% less space in Structure A, located at 3667 McClintock Ave., than had previously been available.
An official in Parking Operations, however, said the spaces in question had always been meant for faculty-staff, and the earlier use of those spaces by students caused serious traffic problems in other areas of the campus.
Much of the fenced-off space went unused Thursday.
Trisha Gordon, administrative assistant for Parking Operations, said the present apportionments for faculty-staff and students is “for a trial period. If we’ve given too much space for the faculty-staff, then there will be a change.”
Gordon said the fencing had been decided upon after overflows arose in the faculty parking areas because of student use of the designated space in Structure A.
“Since today was the first day, many faculty members probably didn’t know about the available spaces in A. We will allocate space for students and faculty wherever it is necessary,” she said.
FACULTY SPACES
STUDENT SPACES